Weep the Willowing Whisper Walks
A near, felled, pretty.
But can she take the dripple drop,
of puffed up ocean me?
Hand me stick, dear talking cane
and glossy boots not dry
Weep the Willowing Whisper Walks
beside her so may I.

Why do I recall that poem, when I hate poetry. I wrote it, and I hate poetry, so why bring it up? What an asswhipe.

Pain in the chest, humph, I have had it ever since I can remember. It brings about visions of me stabbing myself in the heart, over and over, but the pain remains. I am sure it is from lack of water. Fog covers the earth, but where is the rain?

I see the fog, but where, or please where is the rain.

Well, the reason geometry is so underdeveloped which allowed for the discovery is certainly due to the inability to think in terms of a convention of names. Well, maybe I need to crash on this thought.

What if that is the reason I was suppose to discover a new geometric language, to demonstrate the impossibility of common grammar unless one learns how to participate in the naming convention?

It was important enough to be targeted for development at this time, it must have applications beyond what I thought.

I am want to say, that there are no amount of words that can make a person deeper than dew, and, I would be right. This is due to the naming convention, a concept not even taught? Have not found it except in Plato.

But then, how does one help others participate in the convention of names? Example it through the work in geometry? The how does one lay down the principles of common grammar such that concepts are not only learned, but applied? Is it hopeless? or, more probably, I am still too stupid to figure it out.

Life, in of itself, has no meaning. That is an anthropomorphic thought.

Meaning is a function of our job, it is our intention. One has no meaning, when they cannot reason.
Patanjali, parallel walking. As we see, so we think, where we go.

Because there is a law against mislabeling the contents of a package.

I may look stupid, but I was born that way..

I don't drink but perhaps once every two or three years, however, I never have the urge to argue, but laugh.

Well, you will just have to talk a little louder then.

Don't ya just hate it when someone disrespects good lumber?

OMG, did I just hear vows?

what on earth do you have against 2x4's? Do you know how much a good one costs?

You misunderstand, you stand between the beauty and the beast. You were not the target, I was.

how class mechanics applies to reasoning is not generally taught.

Or take a course on language in case one does not see that relation to self is inadmissible.

The part is not different from the whole, when each is a member of a class by the same definition.

Try some buttermilk for that cough.

The question is actually on the same lines as the Zen question, what is the sound of one hand clapping.

The question of who one is, is not grammatically correct, for it assumes the answer is absolute, when it is relative. It is one of those common constructions that become accepted because people generally do not think in terms of meaning.

Who I am to the postman, is just another customer.
Who I am to my son, is his only parent who is there.

Who I am to my boss is the best hone operator he has.

What I am, is absolute.

The episode of Bab 5 and Mr. Sabastian, although very nice, was technically in error.

Who I am, I cannot answer. Who I am is relative, and can vary between being a pauper to a Pope.

What I am, however, is an entirely different story. What I am does not differe from person to person. I am a mind in a human body.

So, although who I am could be anything from a butt-wipe, to a saint, depending upon what I may be doing, what I am is defined by my job, which never varies.

There are two camps in regard to the source of a person’s rights. Some believe that rights are something bestowed upon a person, while others that they are innate, inalienable. These two camps are derivative of the only two elements a living organism can abstract from the environment, material difference and form.

Material difference is relative, and thus rights would be something bestowed upon a person—if they were in fact relative.

Form is absolute, and thus rights are inalienable, meaning neither gods nor men, not even one’s self can bestow them or take them away.

Definition determines class membership, the foundation of judgment itself. Definition is absolute.

Definition, in language, determines the principles of predication. One cannot claim that a person’s rights are something granted one by anyone or any thing, without violating the principles of the grammar the claim is made in. Thus, one cannot even surrender their rights, or bestow their rights without violating the very grammar the agreement is made in. It would be gibberish.

Therefore, those who claim to have rights in regard to other people are plainly, by the principles of grammar they speak and write in, speaking gibberish also.

What then are our rights, as a living organism? What are the rights no one, no man, nor any god, can take from us?

Every living organism must acquire its sustenance from the environment. It acquires this nourishment via systems which may be called environmental acquisition systems. Let me propose a definition by which one can determine class membership.

Definition: An environmental acquisition system of a living organism is that system of an organism, which must acquire something from the environment, process that which it has acquired for a product that maintains and promotes the life of that organism.

1) The digestive system.
2) The respiratory system.
3) The vestibular system.
4) The ocular system.
5) The manipulative system.
6) The procreative system.
7) The judgmental system.

Each of these systems produces for one’s own body. By each and every one of them we maintain and promote the life of the body. Each of these is a crafting system. Thus, human rights resolve down to the rights of a craftsman to be the beneficiary of his own labor. This is what is meant by “and he shall cause craft to prosper.” We are evolving to be craftsmen and have dominion over the earth.

Of the 7, we are mind, the last. Our craft is reason in order to predict the results of human action that maintains and promotes our life. In so doing for ourselves, we shall do for all life.